Quality Assurance Framework British Columbia Green Paper March 2013

Transcription

1 British Columbia Green Paper March 2013 College of the Rockies March 11, 2013

2 Institutions Covered by the Framework Public: 11 colleges 7 teaching-intensive universities 4 research-intensive universities 3 institutes 17 degree-granting institutions authorized under the DAA 330 private career training schools 13 private theological institutions over 40 Aboriginal-controlled institutes an unknown number of private language schools an unknown number of private post-secondary academic (non-degree granting) institutions

3 Bodies which Monitor and Evaluate Quality Degree Quality Assessment Board (DQAB): ensures that new degree programs meet quality criteria. Private Career Training Institutions Agency (PCTIA): regulates private career training institutions. Industry Training Authority (ITA): leads, coordinates, and funds training in the trades; issues credentials and sets standards. Ministry of Advanced Education, Innovation and Technology (AEIT): evaluates institutions and determines suitability for the Education Quality Assurance (EQA) and StudentAid BC (SABC) designations.

4 Focus Current Practices Academic quality: does the institution have policies and procedures for quality assessment which are consistently applied? faculty and staff to deliver the program? support services to facilitate student success? Operational capacity: does the institution have appropriate and well functioning governance structures financial resources to sustain quality programs Student experience: are the skills and knowledge gained relevant? are students satisfied with the quality of instruction they received? does their education impact labour market outcomes? Fit with mission and mandate: is there fidelity to mission and mandate as established by the institution and government.

5 Responsibilities Current Practices The institutional mission and mandate is negotiated between government and the institution. the quality assurance body assesses academic and operational quality, as determined by the mission and mandate of the institution. the insitution leverages its areas of excellence by program expansion within the parameters of its mission and mandate. the government assesses mandate alignment for new programs but not academic or operational quality.

6 The Capability Maturity Model Definition (Capability Maturity Model) A maturity model is a set of structured levels that describes how well the behaviors, practices and processes of an organization can reliably and sustainably produce required outcomes. the model has five levels ad hoc practices process is documented formally defined steps managed result metrics active optimization of processes provides a continuum along which process maturity can be developed incrementally

7 The Capability Maturity Model: Levels 1 Initial (chaotic, ad hoc, individual heroics): the starting point for use of a new or undocumented process. 2 Repeatable: the process is sufficiently documented that repeating the same steps may be attempted. 3 Defined: the process is defined/confirmed as a standard business process, and decomposed to levels. 4 Managed: the process is quantitatively managed in accordance with agreed-upon metrics. 5 Optimizing: process management includes deliberate process optimization/improvement.

8 Organizational Focus: 1 informal and ad hoc. 2 defining internal quality standards, goals, processes, practices. 3 refining and documenting quality standards, goals, processes, practices. 4 systematic application of quality standards, processes and practices. 5 regular reviews of the quality assessment processes to ensure coherence and continuous quality improvement.

9 Organizational Approach: 1 reactive problem solving, often in response to a regulatory body. 2 reactive problem solving, often in response to a regulatory body. 3 primarily proactive problem solving to seek quality improvements. 4 systematic application of quality standards, processes and practices. 5 proactive problem identification, improving process effectiveness through the use of metrics and benchmarking against world institutions.

10 Responsibility for Quality Assessment: 1 informal and is dependent upon the individual. 2 dependent upon the individual. 3 centralized within the organization and becoming more systematic. 4 organization-wide with accountability structures to evaluate and execute established processes. 5 a culture of quality and quality improvement is embedded in the institution.

11 Quality Assessment Current Practices 1 is ad hoc. 2 is inconsistent. 3 primarily driven by key quality indicators established by an external body. 4 periodic, consistently follows established processes and is externally validated. Institution engages in program renewal. 5 comprehensive, periodic, follows established processes and is externally validated. Institution continually engages in comprehensive program renewal.

12 Practices that Influence Maturity Level: self-evaluation and external quality verification involvement of external experts internal and external stakeholders are included in the quality assessment and quality improvement processes ability to achieve recognized accreditation or certification for professional programs

13 for Levels 1 and 2 the institution is monitored and reviewed rather than the internal quality assessment processes and practices programs require quality approval and are periodically subject to re-review

14 for Level 3 after the initial program approval, the process is reviewed rather than the program the reviews for these institutions are more frequent than for higher levels there is a reduction in costs associated with external monitoring

15 for Levels 4 and 5 process review rather than program review there are low frequency, periodic reviews of their internal quality improvement processes and random periodic checks of completed program reviews the periodic checks assess the suitability of the institution s internal review processes but not the review itself there are minimal costs for external quality evaluation

16 Accreditation Current Practices must be level 3 or higher to be elegible for SABC designation and to enrol international students must be level 4 or higher to be elegible for EQA designation must be level 5 to be elegible for EQA Gold designation

17 Government s Responsibility to ensure that key objectives are accomplished by setting policy, standards and indicators that institutions are required to meet in the maturity model to establish the quality assurance maturity level of individual institutions to set broad mandates for public institutions and ensure effective system coordination in the delivery of post-secondary programs.

18 Responsibility of the Program Review Body to review institutions against the government s established standards and advise government and the institutions of the results to provide advice and recommendations to government for decision membership: individuals who have demonstrated a commitment to the principles and practices of quality assurance in post-secondary education

19 Time Line Current Practices Spring 2012: Quality Assurance Discussion Paper. March 2013: Green Paper, consultations. Feedback must be submitted by April 12, Summer 2013: complete Framework. Fall 2013: legislation, and phased implementation.